This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
From Polar Vortex To Solar Vortex: Globe Suffers Hottest May On Record
Just when you thought it was safe to leave your shelter and buy a car, buy a home, buy some Caterpillar trucks, and buy a Starbucks; NOAA reports the globe just experienced the hottest May on record... With El Nino looming, we can only imagine the excuses of 'extreme weather' that will rear its ugly head once again in Q2 earnings... though of course all this will be fixed in Q3?
Source: @NOAA
- 18281 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -



If I had tried this in my master's thesis defense, I would have gotten kicked out of school. It disgusts me that scientists have sold out scientific integrity for something as worthless as fiat currency.
I agree, what Goddard did was intellectually dishonest....
fuck the planet and fuck ALL species and fuck mother nature.
mankind will destroy the planet until mankind is able to control themselves, or until mankind is extinct.
that is the truth. and every oligarch knows this truth.
'environmentalism' is generally a scam, and the only reason it ever gets any attention is when human beings themselves are actually dying from cancer fouled air or fouled water on a short term immediate basis, that is to say, we don't care about the environment at all, only care about political expediency which places the environment at issue only when a very substantial number of human beings are suffering so much so that the inclusion of the upper middle and elites are suffering as well.
the only point at which humanity will truly be able to make decisions for the benefit of LONG TERM PLANETARY PLANNING----is when there will be a futuristic world where humanity has the benfits of a world wide civilization that eliminated hunger and basic disease and infant mortality for all.
by this i mean, until the science fiction future arrives, or until perhaps some manner of future global government eliminates the pestilence(s) continuously affecting the developing world , including the economic models that fight against one world government----------you have no shot at any policy that truly helps the gobal environment.
what you will have is just what we have now, half assed scamulism mascarading as helping the gobal environment by doing 1 or 2 good things that have no chance of systemically ending our unprecedented abuse of our global resources.
the big 2 are
deforestation in indonesia, africa and brazil goes on unabated.....
species wide extinction of the seas by overfishing and polluting the ocean.
truly they are not that problematic as the world itself and the global biome could recover if only all human civilizations were to collapse and pre-agrarian humanity took to subsidence levels of development. of course billions of human beings would die in that scenario.
so if you want future with global sustainabiliyt AND billions of people living in stabile civilized cities---you are going to need one world government and a SHIT ton of advanced technologies that replace our current destructive as hell hydro-carbon tree killing livestock breeding society.
simple fixes.
solar wind nuclear via an advanced electric grid WORLD WIDE.
ban on the use of paper in favor of recycle-able persistent use electronic tablets. and insects+lab grown meat.
none of that will ever happen on a world wide basis without global govenrment. so until then...enjoy paper seafood and your gasoline ALL YOU WANT> and don't feel guilty. this will not last forever.
simply wrong, the planet will still exist and do whatever it does long long long after mankind is gone again
it did perfectly swell and chaotic for millions of years before there was any man and will do just as swell and chaotic for millions of years after man is gone extinct.
just don't ask me how or when, nobody knows
Yeah, the planet will exist. As a rock in space, like the moon or asteroids. Just another orbital rock. And it'll be that until the sun becomes a red giant and engulfes the damn rock in the end. Which doesn't say anything about the biosphere though. That can go away pretty quick. Just to think that things like coffee, cacao and quinoa can only exist in a very limited climatic range should make everyone think twice... guess it ain't enough.
were you replying to me ? either i'm misreading you and you are misreading me , becasue i agree with EVEYRTHING you said.
i think the plethora of donvotes i received are from people who don't exactly get what i'm saying.
civilzation---NOT HUMAN BEINGS----are essentially a plague of overgrowth upon the global biome.
it's like individual bacteria can be fine but a colony can overgrow.
civilization IS about 8000 years old as we estimate it. while we have evidence humanity has it's roots up to 2.4 million years ago. we know that ancient glaciation and glacial melting resulted in much of the terrain of our earth being covered under 160 meters of water . the coastal shelves of all major land masses show that there was a plethora of terrain which humans most likely inhabited for large swatths of the past. it is hard for us to have ANY evidence of what went on before 13,000 or so years ago. why ? because of ice and water patterns washing and freezing away just about ANY trace of civlizations before that era. =----if there even were any.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Pleistocene
if you do believe in evolution and take the completeness of the archeological records we have with a grain of salt, then you realize you have a whole era before 13,000 years ago that archeologists have decided to describe as a 1100 year period where human beings, lalong with neandertal and other species , co-existed on the planet with MANY times of of large beasts, some of which we have well documented evidence of their extinction at the hands of mankind. mastodons, giant sloth, and a few others that we have evidence had been eaten byi'primitive' mankind.
so even in an era without mechnaization, human beings were able to kill off species, in a sustainable ecosystem, at least 'relative' in terms of what 'sustainable' is now defined as in the post industrial sense.
human beings are a force of nature. and nature sometimes creates species that do crowd out and compete with other species to the point of extinction.
the issue in defining a debate about what this means in the modern context is not talkinga bout 'humanity' but about CIVIlization.
WE ALL know human beings can live in very different ways should civlization collapse. but while that is possible, and while it is even possible the modern world follows its roman paradigm into a collaps----the fall of the roman empire and so called dark ages were NOT the end of civlization. they were the demarcation of one civilzation in favor of another. the collapse of a society with complex features gave way to ones with simpler features in western europe, and whatever complexity remained transformed into post roman italy, and byzantium.
i think we all agree that NONE of that is a problem for nature. so why are in disagreement that WE are a problem for nature?
WE are not. FUKUSHIMA is not.
no matter how horrible we are, the problems we create are problems FOR OURSELVES< and those problems manifest in the political context of leadership becasue those are the only places where the problems can be solved within the context of CHANGING THE ECONOMIC LEADERSHIP OF THE SYSTEM.
while it's obviously a nice thing to have an ethical concientiousness as an individual toward the environment ( i ride a bike, live in the city, try not to fly, and generally consume less than many out there) -----these attributes make no difference to the overall economic system. worse, these patterns of 'concientiousness' are used by opportunist cult leader consumerists who build ENTIRE PRODUCT LINES AND CONSUMPTION PATTERNS TO HELP people pretend they are being more self righteousness about their consumption, creating a cult of identity which is actually just more polluting and a method of encouraging people to be deluded about society works, and about how their view of themselves in relation to society works.
these perpetual lies used to build insincere political movements, to sell products, and to build cult of identity are lies that will eventually be rendered stale and die a pathetic pop-culture death. trending up and then down as the waves of advertising revenue ebb and flow.
and i am not even going to mention the hypocrisy of the self righteousness movements wehre people talk about animal rights , or not eating dogs, and then turn around and give their blessing to our auschwitz factory farms by eating all that factory meat ( i eat it now and then, just i dont' lie about the importance of possessing double standards ) .
it's ok. just fuck mother earth. she's going to fuck you back anyways. ultimately the universe is a cruel fucking thing to life itself and far more to sentient life, far crueler than ghenghis khan because of its dispassionate and highly scalable destructiveness through volcanoes earthquakes war pestilence disease asteroids solar flares, cosmic fuckage etc.....
stop being a bunch of do gooder WorldWildlifeFun and GreenMountainClub pussies.
it's all fucked. all of it. kill the last panda and eat him. and don't use too much salt.
The global environment requires three actions: eliminate government, central banking and law. These are the reasons for all the problems, therefore, they cannot be the solution to any of them. Solutions come from another answer set. Keep your global tyranny to yourself.
"You think man can destroy the planet? What intoxicating vanity. Let me tell you about our planet. Earth is four-and-a-half-billion-years-old. There’s been life on it for nearly that long, 3.8 billion years. Bacteria first; later the first multicellular life, then the first complex creatures in the sea, on the land. Then finally the great sweeping ages of animals, the amphibians, the dinosaurs, at last the mammals, each one enduring millions on millions of years, great dynasties of creatures rising, flourishing, dying away — all this against a background of continuous and violent upheaval. Mountain ranges thrust up, eroded away, cometary impacts, volcano eruptions, oceans rising and falling, whole continents moving, an endless, constant, violent change, colliding, buckling to make mountains over millions of years. Earth has survived everything in its time. It will certainly survive us. If all the nuclear weapons in the world went off at once and all the plants, all the animals died and the earth was sizzling hot for a hundred thousand years, life would survive, somewhere: under the soil, frozen in Arctic ice. Sooner or later, when the planet was no longer inhospitable, life would spread again. The evolutionary process would begin again. It might take a few billion years for life to regain its present variety. Of course, it would be very different from what it is now, but the earth would survive our folly, only we would not. If the ozone layer gets thinner, ultraviolet radiation sears the earth, so what? Ultraviolet radiation is good for life. It’s powerful energy. It promotes mutation, change. Many forms of life will thrive with more UV radiation. Many others will die out. Do you think this is the first time that’s happened? Think about oxygen. Necessary for life now, but oxygen is actually a metabolic poison, a corrosive gas, like fluorine. When oxygen was first produced as a waste product by certain plant cells some three billion years ago, it created a crisis for all other life on earth. Those plants were polluting the environment, exhaling a lethal gas. Earth eventually had an atmosphere incompatible with life. Nevertheless, life on earth took care of itself. In the thinking of the human being a hundred years is a long time. A hundred years ago we didn’t have cars, airplanes, computers or vaccines. It was a whole different world, but to the earth, a hundred years is nothing. A million years is nothing. This planet lives and breathes on a much vaster scale. We can’t imagine its slow and powerful rhythms, and we haven’t got the humility to try. We’ve been residents here for the blink of an eye. If we’re gone tomorrow, the earth will not miss us."
Jurassic Park
Michael Crichton
Michael doesn't seem aware of nuclear weapons 'tseems.
Whether the world is too hot, too cold, too dry, not dry enough, too windy, not windy enough, too cloudy, not cloudy enough, too dusty, not dusty enough, whatever, you can always be sure that the problem is due to TOO MANY PESKY HUMANS. This has been proven by certified bona fide, peer reviewed experts.
But fear not! Government can fix the problem with a few new taxes and 70 more layers of bureaucracy.
Experts like Professor Paul R. Ehrlich...right...got it.
And Simon would have lost the bet not that many years later...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon%E2%80%93Ehrlich_wager
This shows you the ignorance of liberals...attempting to control Carbon Credits.
If they had any brains at all, they would be trying to monopolize clean water.
We have the Great Lakes
O...M...G!!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!
Ok, not really. I'm sure some fucking ginormous scumbag will try to trump this up and make a dollar (or a billion) :cough:AlGore:cough: off this.
All I know is my fruit trees are going crazy!! It's a bumper crop this year.
Yes, global does mean YOUR backyard.
My garden is dying from rain everyday, but my backyard is not the globe.
Is this the same NOAA that just got caught tampering temperature records to create non-existent warming?
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/06/23/noaanasa-dramatically-alte...
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/06/23/Global-warming-Fabr...
Yes.
You caused it!
Wow, that generated allot of hits.
In the 1500s the Swiss used to pick apples in MAY.
I like it hot!
Well, it looks like a good day of pageviews for the Steven Goddard guy, and the rest of the Breitbart/Drudge right-blogosphere.
All I know is, here in the middle of the continent (Minneapolis) we typically get weather extremes. We're kind of proud of it. But it's been getting extremier over the past decade for sure. In my neighborhood most of the houses are 90 years old or so. The guy whose company I hire to do most of the upkeep I can't do myself says he's getting all kinds of work because the houses aren't built to deal with the deluge rains we've been getting. Never really had them before. Now we get "500 year floods" annually, and once-in-a-lifetime extreme rain events a couple times a summer. I had to pay him to re-do some of the concrete in my basement and put in a sump system. I'm the third or fourth guy on my block who's done that in the past couple years. Nobody has sump pumps in this area; never needed them until now. And he's putting in all kinds of swales and French Drains because nobody has ever had to dispose of so much rain water as we've had to in the past few years.
We're seeing weather patterns stalling out overhead like we haven't in the past. This past winter is was cold as a witch's tit all winter which isn't new in Minnesota, except we had almost no days with highs in the 20s. One quick thaw, and highs in the single-digits and low teens for a couple of months. We usually have a lot more variability the Jet Stream has been acting weird. We're usually on one side of it and a couple days later on the other side. Recently though it's been getting "stuck" like it usually hasn't.
I don't know why this is, but I know what I see and I trust the roofers, landscapers, drainage guys, window and door guys, exterior painters; all the people who deal with the weather every day and know that it has changed and what we've been doing here for a century-and-a-helf doesn't work as well anymore.
Come out to Stillwater dumbass, its unusually usual out here.. In 1985 we had a 12" dump in 5 hours was that cooling then or?? Gosh I cannot wait to leave MN to the Libtards...
See ya. If you haven't noticed anything odd about the weather in the past few years you're remarkably unobservant.
Note that I didn't say why I thought the weather has been unusual. I merely said that it has been. Maybe you don't own and maintain property. If you did, the people you would associate with would let you know that they're changing their building techniques to adapt to the weather, which has changed. If you had gardens or landscaping on your property, you'd know that the growing zones in our region are moving steadily northward, as is the line between mostly coniferous and mostly deciduous forests.
But then, you live in MN-6, so observable reality all around you isn't going to interfere with the opinions you're given by your "team."
Much more property than you, more animals, more gardens probably more everything.. My gardens and hay tell me the world is getting colder and wetter and the last two winters were the worst i've seen since 1982. But it means nothing as my head will not go into the MMGW noose its not going to happen neither you, Dayton or the moonbat morons in MPLS can make that happen. Lake Superior broke what record this year?? There were icebergs floating in Superior two weeks ago.. Stay in MPLS its scary out here..
What the fuck is your problem? your old lady must have run off to Minneapolis with a black homosexual.
Hey, swmnguy ... Do you know how ignorant you are? You don't even know that Matt Drudge is a Democrat. A homosexual. A liberal. His website has a left-wing bias (albeit significantly less than most other main stream outlets). But you're out there running around with the stupid and patently meme that likens him to the Koch Brothers.
You can't even figure out the difference between a liberal, homosexual, Democrat and Dick Cheney, but I'm supposed to trust you and your ilk on global warming?
Now, this might be the single stupidest comment I've read on ZH in quite some time.
First off, if I'm so ignorant, how the fuck would I know how ignorant I am? I'd be ignorant of that as well, wouldn't you think? Or, as the rest of your comment reveals, you didn't think at all.
Who ever said anything about something as stupid as what party Matt Drudge says he belongs to? Then you insinuate that there are no right-wing homosexuals? Oh, yeah, and he has a left-wing bias. And who the hell mentioned the Koch Brothers? Oh, yeah. That was you. And please, for the love of God, leave poor Dick Cheney out of this. He's suffered quite enough, I'd say.
I didn't even mention Global Warming, you stupid fuck. I was talking about my back yard. Hell, even "Calmyourself" and "Jerome Lester Horwitz" noticed that. Thank God I didn't mention the New York Yankees or the War of the Spanish Succession. You might have shat yourself.
Yes, because your back yard is global.
I live in the other corner of the world and last summer was record breaking. And not only here though, all around the SH it was a fiery hell.
All the better to roast all of those Nazi war criminals hiding down there!
No doubt you noticed that to start off my comment, I mentioned that I didn't know why this was happening. I also didn't make any broad generalizations.
Actually, the only person who implied that my back yard is global is you. So your comment was not only a straw man, but had already been refuted by my original post.
Why would you bother to waste your time like that?
MPLS Moonbat they infest the place. Cockroaches with green bicycles..
Rapid carbon sequestrationd destoryed the dinosaurs' tropical paradise.
Hedgetardtastic!
Idiots that find it witty to use the word retard in different forms to throw around accusingly are proven to suffering from the retardation that they project to others.
When you start throwing around some real science, I stop calling you a hedgetard...
All I have seen you push are strawman based attacks and poor excuses of for algebra.
There's no way you even got past the 220 series MAT courses without sucking some knob or just copying someone else.
Hottest May on record!!! We've got records going back hundreds of months!
It was hotter once, thing is that we didn't call it May...
comment of the day LMFAO
I didnt go out and buy anything last month as it was too hot out.
Last December it was so cold that I had to stay in. I'm still trying to spend the money that I saved.
EM field shifting like a teeter-totter.... anomaly increase, deviation increase of both sides of the equation. Happens when the field is preparing to shift... long overdue and same goes for our interglacial, which was 'fun' while it lasted, no? next year should be a lovely roller-coaster ride.
I know of no global warmers, wetters, driers, or climate changers that have ever done anything useful in their entire lives. They are all mooches and parasites that are living fat lives at the expense of those of us who actually produce real things that other people need, and willingly buy.
That's a fraud.
Those who truly produce things, like crops so we can eat, are hurt most by global warming.
Hi. Wanna buy some hay? Now you know. (BTC or LTC accepted here)
AGW today is as much a hoax/fraud as the global cooling pushed in the 1970s.
Earth surface temps have been far warmer (and cooler) the not too distant past, and varied sharply. Man had nothing to do with it.
AGW is a tool, part of an agenda, goal to move money, gain power, achieve control. It is fraud, will be proven so, and it's perpetration is all, like most everything today except select IRS emails, on permanent record... Pursuing a global fraud these days would seem to be risky business. Be careful out there, folks.
And you are a dumb fuck Hedgetard....
... Na-nana-naa-nah!
There. Finished it for you.
I cant wait until it like all llies comes completely unraveled of its own gravitation force, space bends under this ponzi..
Already done.
Denialists pretend there is no warming, thermometers measure warming, therefore denialists lies have come unravelled and are finished.
Below is from the NASA GISS Surface Temperature Analysis webpage.
Their AGW claim is not being supported by a mere thermometer. The term "inferred" shows up a lot.
[begin excerpt]
The basic GISS temperature analysis scheme was defined in the late 1970s by James Hansen when a method of estimating global temperature change was needed for comparison with one-dimensional global climate models. Most prior temperature analyses, notably those of Murray Mitchell, covered only 20-90°N latitudes. Our first published results (Hansen et al. 1981) showed that, contrary to impressions from northern latitudes, global cooling after 1940 was small, and there was net global warming of about 0.4°C between the 1880s and 1970s.
The analysis method was documented in Hansen and Lebedeff (1987), showing that the correlation of temperature change was reasonably strong for stations separated by up to 1200 km, especially at middle and high latitudes. They obtained quantitative estimates of the error in annual and 5-year mean temperature change by sampling at station locations a spatially complete data set of a long run of a global climate model, which was shown to have realistic spatial and temporal variability.
This derived error bar only addressed the error due to incomplete spatial coverage of measurements. As there are other potential sources of error, such as urban warming near meteorological stations, etc., many other methods have been used to verify the approximate magnitude of inferred global warming. These methods include inference of surface temperature change from vertical temperature profiles in the ground (bore holes) at many sites around the world, rate of glacier retreat at many locations, and studies by several groups of the effect of urban and other local human influences on the global temperature record. All of these yield consistent estimates of the approximate magnitude of global warming, which now stands at about twice the magnitude that we reported in 1981. Further affirmation of the reality of the warming is its spatial distribution, which has largest values at locations remote from any local human influence, with a global pattern consistent with that expected for response to global climate forcings (larger in the Northern Hemisphere than the Southern Hemisphere, larger at high latitudes than low latitudes, larger over land than over ocean).
Subsequent improvements (Hansen et al. 1999; Hansen et al. 2001) to the original analysis included use of satellite-observed night lights to determine which stations in the United States are located in urban and peri-urban areas, the long-term trends of those stations being adjusted to agree with long-term trends of nearby rural stations.
Current Analysis MethodThe current analysis uses satellite observed nightlights to identify measurement stations located in extreme darkness and adjust temperature trends of urban and peri-urban stations for non-climatic factors, verifying that urban effects on analyzed global change are small. A paper describing the current analysis was published (Hansen et al. 2010) in Reviews of Geophysics in December 2010. The paper compares alternative analyses, and address questions about perception and reality of global warming. Alternative choices for the ocean data are tested. It is shown that global temperature change is sensitive to estimated temperature change in polar regions, where observations are limited. We suggest use of 12-month (and n×12) running mean temperature to fully remove the annual cycle and improve information content in temperature graphs. We conclude that global temperature continued to rise rapidly in the past decade, despite large year-to-year fluctuations associated with the El Niño-La Niña cycle of tropical ocean temperature. Record high global temperature during the period with instrumental data was reached in 2010. After that paper appeared, version 3 of the GHCN data became available. The current analysis is now based on the adjusted GHCN v3 data for the data over land. The ocean data are now based on NOAA ERSST for the sake of simplicity, replacing a prior concatenation of Hadley Center's HadSST1 and the satellite-based NOAA (Reynolds) OISST.
We maintain a running record of any modifications made to the analysis, available on our Updates to Analysis page.
[end excerpt]
link: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
citing Hansen, a documented loon, is this what you got, you know the guy who wants genicide to reduce man made global warming, that hansen?? just go away, you shame yourself here, we have people who know and have read much of the so called proof about AGW..now prove AGW. or as stated go suck some co2
You realize that part of the above is how the UHI is corrected for...
Not that you would even bothering trying to learn something...
Classic Hedgetard...
So, must be aliens, right Giorgi?
I believe other planets in the solar system have also exhibited temperature elevations since we've been monitoring them, TO MANY FUCKING SUV'S ON JUPITER APPARENTLY!
What you believe is of no relevance to science....
And no, the other planets are not warming because of increased solar output...
not just any aliens : LIBERT-ALIENS.
You believe incorrectly: there are no measurements whatsoever showing the other planets warming. Worse, due to the inverse square law, to have measurements at the outer planets that we could even discern, would mean nearer (us) would be so hot the oceans would boil right off. It can't be true because such a situation would mean we're too dead to debate if it's true.
It is not. Fiat money is that tool, global warming is actually the real method to kill off the poor who are too weak & unwilling to migrate to be excellent slaves for the elite.
Fiat money is fake money, global warming is real genocide and man-made.
AntiAGW is pro-elite pro-banker lies designed to maximize the kill-count.
You're on the side of the global terrorists lead by the Bankster Mafia.
Interesting comment MDB. Radical Marijuana discusses death controls and fiat money as well and I would be interested to hear his thoughts on your comment. In a nutshell, could it be that; science discovered AGW decades ago, anti-AGW was born from genuine uncertainty coupled with genocidal maniacs, maturing into madness as the science points more and more towards a sixth mass-extinction the maniacs never anticipated? The 'Leaders' lost control and we've been spiraling out of control for many years? Are there winds of change blowing in on Paris?
I'm sure he'll have a lot to say. :)
paging Radical Marijuana lol : ) While I was trying to prod da RadMan to reply, I was hoping to get some insight as to how you feel about the AR5 and the rapidly approaching Conference Of Parties (from hell!!!)
Haven't given it a thought. Reducing actual wasted energy & pollution is the most I can do & nothing else matters. That's what I do.
I live (part time) in the rural upper midwest. I just want to be able to grow a pineapple in the yard. Is that too much to ask?
What determines 'the average'? This is all above average...but no one is asking what determines average.
The article does not say anything about average.
Be cool this summer, send Al Gore more money.
And demand that the DC US pols and crats have the climate data fudged more so it's cooler.
/s
Of course it's getting warmer - the planet is in an interglacial period. When it starts getting colder, our descendants will miss the heat.
An interglacial period (or alternatively interglacial) is a geological interval of warmer global average temperature lasting thousands of years that separates consecutive glacial periods within an ice age. The current Holocene interglacial has persisted since the end of the Pleistocene, about 11,700 years ago.
During the 2.5 million year span of the Pleistocene, numerous glacials, or significant advances of continental ice sheets in North America and Europe have occurred at intervals of approximately 40,000 to 100,000 years. These long glacial periods were separated by more temperate and shorter interglacials.
During interglacials, such as the present one, the climate warms and the tundra recedes polewards following the ice sheets. Forests return to areas that once supported tundra vegetation. Interglacials are identified on land or in shallow epicontinental seas by their paleontology. Floral and faunal remains of species pointing to temperate climate and indicating a specific age are used to identify particular interglacials. Commonly used are mammalian and molluscan species, pollen and plant macro-remains (seeds and fruits). However, many other fossil remains may be helpful: insects, ostracods, foraminifera, diatoms, etc. Recently, ice cores and ocean sediment cores provide more quantitative and accurately dated evidence for temperatures and total ice volumes.
The interglacials and glacials coincide with cyclic changes in the Earth's orbit. Three orbital variations contribute to interglacials. The first is a change in the Earth's orbit around the sun, or eccentricity. The second is a shift in the tilt of the Earth's axis, the obliquity. The third is precession, or wobbling motion of Earth's axis.[1] Warm summers in the northern hemisphere occur when that hemisphere is tilted toward the sun and the Earth is nearest the sun in its elliptical orbit. Cool summers occur when the Earth is farthest from the sun during that season. These effects are more pronounced when the eccentricity of the orbit is large. When the obliquity is large, seasonal changes are more extreme.[2]
source: Wikipedia
May was very nice in my neck of the woods.
Here too and June was cooler than other years. So it's all awash. So much hype over one bloody month of warm weather. Geez, is there nothing else going on? How about war and refugee crisis in Iraq? That's a real nightmare waiting to happen.
You and your neighbors must have sent enough to the Great and Powerful Oz, I mean Gore, to placate him and have him bestow cool temps on you and yours. Rejoice!
Another way to think about "climate change," or what ever they are disguising it as this week, is to realize if it were real the criminals of government wouldn’t give a shit.
Being that it is fake, they can’t lose, as they get more of our labor, product and power and they get to say, “See, all fixed, aren’t we swell.”
“My guillotine reduces “carbon emissions,” and theft and murder one pol, crat and bankster at a time. It’s like a “Swiss-Army Knife for society.”
kchrisc, that is the BEST argument I've heard all day! Up vote for you!
NOOA´s reference stretches back until to 1880, when satellites presumably already started gathering radiation data globally. Shouldn´t this be the case they are comparing apples to oranges.
we had satellites in 1880? WOW - who knew.
NOOA had global records since then.
So based on the earth being about 4 Billion years old, May was the hottest May ever,
Go figure
Is that before of after the two degree 'correction' factor that is added to all measurements to make it look like global warming is not a socialist/democrat lie to raise taxes on working people?
The global warming/climate change movement is about one thing: CONTROL. Control of your lives from birth to death.
- Whether you are allowed to be born or not.
- Whether you are allowed to reproduce.
- Whether your life will be viewed as beneficial by the State or if you've become a 'useless eater'.
- Whether you are beneficial to the people at the very top.
- Whether you can produce enough cash and have your rights reduced to keep the powerful... powerful.
- Whether you can live in a home of your choosing, drive a car of your choosing, eat food of your choosing, own pets of your choosing, have land of your choosing, have anything of your choosing.
- Whether you're a problem deist or an enlightened worldly athiest.
- Whether you are an individual (bad) or part of the Collective (good).
- Whether you contribute or take from the 'global village.
People, we talk about this stuff all the time on this site under the titles of media, banking, entertainment, clergy, and politicians. Yet along come 'environmentalists' and they're given a free pass. With absolutely no proof of what they claim OTHER THAN STATS THAT THEY AND THEY ALONE GENERATE.
Time to lump these guys in with the rest of the lying, philandering, money and power-obsessed so-called leadership running us today.
Truly, the 3000 of them running the 330 million of us know what they're doing...
and Agenda 21 will be the mechanism of control, also called sustainability.
How often do they let you out of your bubble?
no.
The control is the IMPLEMENTATION of global warming, to rob people of their homes and their food supplies.
The intent is not to depopulate but to drain down all resources for resistance.
If you have no food & no home you'll do what you're told, you'll beg to be put in debt to serve the corporate overlords.
Global warming is a scam because it's real and the cause is mafia overlordship.
The second scam is to pretend there's no global warming to prevent anyone from rising up to stop it.
This latest climate data may actually be real.
Wow.
When over 97% of the science community and virtually every single science organisation in the world say human induced global warming is 100% verifiable and confirmed - there can be no argument.
These are the same scientists you trust to provide you with the proofs of gravity or cosmology or are trusted to design life-saving drugs, medical treatments and all manner of technology. Yet when it comes to climate science - a class of science based on the combination of various fields of study, most commentators on here reckon they know better. That's plain stupid.
you're kidding, right?
No he is not...
You're the punchline...
97% concensus is a fabrication. http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/15624-cooking-climat...
Here is Richard Tol's web site and here is quote in his own words:
http://richardtol.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/draft-comment-on-97-consensus-p...
You are one dumb Hedgetard....
It's not consensus that makes an argument - it's the fact that deniers have no evidence to argue their case.
The north and south pole's data is not included on NOAA's charts.
Back in the 1970's, it was thought that the poles would expand and the hot regions would contract.
Why trust "scientists", "scientific bodies", "scientific community", etc... when you can have all your scientific info from Fox News?
AchtungAffen writes: "Why trust "scientists", "scientific bodies", "scientific community", etc..."
.........when they have a proven track record of lying/falsifying/manipulating data to fit a political agenda and to guarantee their place at the trough of taxpayers' money and to "big-up" their own importance. And while they choose to ignore that "climate change" has been going on for about 4.6 billion years, with today's changes being miniscule by comparison. And the "scientists", "scientific bodies", "scientific community" who don't subscribe to the required group-think get their funding cut and are shunned by the true believers.
I don't know why we should trust any of them.
Oh you mean the East Anglia scam? Where there was a hack, and a very limited and selective release. Whose results were under trial several times and found nothing. Yeah sure.
Climate Change? It wasn't being called that until that republican PPRR mogul decided that was the best term to instill doubt on the science... Yeah, it's climate change. Yeah, climate changes. But what we have is a human induced climate change which points towards global warming. And if you believe science and its method is the best way to describe reality we have, then there's no doubt. As far as the science today knows, AGW has 97% or more probabilites of being true. And over 90% of scientists agree.
It's funny how picky you're with believing science. But you don't seem very picky when it's believing oil companies PPRR campaigns such as the Heartland Institute.
The East Anglia racket was only one of the exposures of the scam.
For a few years there have been a long list of reports of IPCC climate scientists who don't agree with official "group-think" requirements or have voiced concerns about sensational doomsday language used or produce different conclusions from the data etc, being intimidated, threatened with expulsion from their jobs or their orgs having funding cut and a lot more. It has got to the point where minority reports are being issued, but of course these rarely make it into MSM which is fully on side with the political propaganda.
Regarding the term "climate change", as you well know it was originally called "global warming" and was only changed by the lying political elites due to evidence that GW wasn't taking place. As for 97% of evidence pointing to AGW, LOL.
In the UK, I am on record saying ~10 years ago that instead of the political elites lying about AGW as a means to raise taxes, they should focus on: improving drainage systems, improving flood defences and dredging rivers etc etc. The English floods of last winter have proved me 100% correct. Government has been heavily criticiesd for not doing all the things I suggested.
Climate Change is a matter for Mother Nature. OUR role should be to recognise that and adjust our man-made environment to accomodate it. How many rivers have you dredged this week?? LOL.
The East Anglia hack was the real racket. They cherry picked lines that seemed to show em manipulating data, when it was just a context error (which of course the hackers didn't care to specify). And funniy it happened just during COPP15.
You gotta be kidding me. IPCC reports are the most conservative reports produced on global warming. In fact, a lot of the scientific community complains that their scenarios are way too mild. More considering that the worst scenarios from a decade ago, are the observable real scenarios today.
Nah. The term Climate Change came into place due to this asshole RRPP to put doubt on science. Because if you follow the science you'd know that warming has been going on, and gaining speed. In fact I saw an interview with the guy, the douchebag was even proud of that.
The English floods of late were the result of the moistest winter ever recorded on the island. Of course no available drainage (mostly built decades or even centuries ago) can cope with a climate that changed and got warmer.
The thing is that climate change would be the independent variable if nature was driving it. But it wasn't Nature that put carbon stored millions of years underground, in a geological nano-second, into the atmosphere.
There is no such list or you would be able to provide it & it would be verifiable from multiple sources NOT funded by Heartland, Kochs, BP, Exxon.
We're measuring AGW live all day every day, showing both the CO2 output & methane, and the runaway effects on the ocean & the arctic.
To deny this is to carve your own eyeballs out.
#1 no such track record.
#2 real science needs no trust: just repeat the process yourself.
Evidence alone proves AGW is real, global warming is real and deniers have zero evidence to their claims.
one month doth not make a pattern
http://climateconference.heartland.org/register-2/
Heartland Institute... really? Even the labor dept has better credibility than that BS.
So what are you sayin? The BLS data ain't accurate?
Hey, John Coleman was the local weatherman here when I was a kid - don't be dissin him.
No, BLS data is abunch of tortured numbers. And yet, it's much more credible than Heartland, which is pure fabrication. Brought to you by the Cock Bros (C).
I dunno, kinda looking forward to hearing what Patrick Moore has to say. He is by no means a 'koch-sucker' as you allege. But then again name calling doesn't promote open discussion.
http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Greenpeace-Dropout-Sensible-Environmen...
He's being paid by Heartland, which means he's being paid by the Cock Bros. It's like when you read, for example, the papers being put out by big Agro on their GMO's. Studies paid by the industry tend to be biased. Specially when they don't contribute (and straight out do everything possible to stop) independent studies (like Syngenta does).
So, all these scientists are not paid by the government, directly and indirectly, to support global warming? The Koch brothers are a bogey man - and resorting to that lowers the validity of your argument.
Cock bros, invested in the oil industry. Any legislation or attempt to regulate CO2 emissions will hit their pocket. They have a vested financial interest in denying the science, and they do. It's called Heartland Institute.
On the other hand, what financial interests do "goobmints" and universities and all other intl scientific bodies have in this? At least as financially interesting as those from the Cocks or the oil giants?
Because after all, if we were to get serious on AGW, the first thing in order is to leave all known carbon reserves underground. And that'll mean that oil industry's market cap would tank in a second. Which means, stock market collapse.
The "science" as you say has failed to link man made CO2 to the warming that stopped 17 years ago.
All you have are failed models to back your assertions.
The warming we experienced is within natural variation and has stopped. The ocean cycles are a huge factor. The expected El Nino will be short lived and nothing like the 97/98 El Nino, as the PDO is in its cool phase. Soon the AMO will be in its cool phase as well.
And hedgetards who talk about 17 years have demonstrated they have zero credibility...
http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/t5.jpg
The line are 67% and 95% CL contours from 1979-1999 fitted trend...
From
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2014/02/25/by-request/
and
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2014/02/23/uncertain-t/
Quelle Faux Pause....
The science has proved it has been warming every year compared to when you say it stopped. There is no 17 year pause.
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2011-temps.html
NASA Finds 2011 Ninth-Warmest Year on Record
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2010-warmest-year.html
2010 and 2005 tied for warmest years EVER on record
"the next warmest years are 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2007 and 2009, which are statistically tied for third warmest year. The GISS records begin in 1880."
And by the way, the same folks funding the BLS are the ones funding NASA and the NOAA, so I guess those numbers are to be trusted just as much as the BLS?
But they don't finance all the scientific institutions in the world. You know, those whose unanimous consent is required for each IPCC report. And I still don't understand what's this financial incentive the eeeevul goobmint has on AGW... Oh yeah! The wisdom of the Hedgetards: control and taxes... My ass can't stop laughing, as if the goobmint couldn't control or tax you any other way. As if goobmint has anything to win financially (or control-freaky) from an initial state of being uncompetitive due to lower energy consumption and new and more expensive technologies put in place. Specially when the companies who don't want anything to be done on AGW being the biggest funding for people to run for goobmint and beyond...
LOL.
If you're an American tax-payer YOU'RE those same folk funding 'em all.
Heartland! YAY!
Next up, the most accurate employment numbers from the BLS and the one and only true inflation numbers reported by the Federal Reserve.
Really? LOL.
Followed by the federally funded NOAA/NASA/Research numbers on global warming.
OK, I'm not a scientist, don't even play one on TV. But, I have some questions. Let's suppose there is a warming pattern for the sake of argument. Now my 2 questions are:
A) so what? why exactly would we be worse off with warmer tamperatures of a degree or two? or even more? Don't give me 'dust bowls' and that nonsense, we've had those before global warming was all the craze. How many people have proveably died from these alleged temperature increases? If the oceans rise a bit, so what? There is no land where coatal residents can move to? It's a closed loop environment - water isn't leaving or entering the system, true?
Basically what is all the downside to the warming? We hear about 'record' temps and what not. It's warmer now than when the dinosaurs roamed the planet? Does anyone seriously believe we would reach that point again?
Is cooling really where we want to go? Is an Ice Age desired?
B) How would you go about correcting this? Do you seriously trust our government, or any government known to man to make this problem BETTER by gaining MORE control over our lives? In what universe has that ever ended well?
I know pollution, in this country at least, is much less than it was even 50 years ago. In all seriousness, what is supposed to be done that could reverse this alleged warming that is not going to cause riots in the streets when nobody has power, water, or food from the elimination of all sources of pollution?
Just askin. Draconian government action has never solved anything I am aware of - can you provide examples?
A) Minimal increases in global avg temperature can destroy climate sensible species. I mentioned early stuff like coffee, cacao and quinoa. But there are tons of plants and animals which can only exist in a very limited climatic range.
Then there are all the disruptions associated with complex systems in search of a new normal. Which might be floodings, droughts, etc... All sort of climatic catastrophes. You know, like they call storms "The storm of the century" but in the end you get like 4 of those a year.
People has been dying from global warming. A couple years back, a heat wave eliminated a couple thousand old folks in Europe for example. And let's not talk about all those who died due to conflicts generated by climate change (like Afghani shepherds who now shoot each other over a little water because there ain't no more...).
When dinosaurs roamed the planet there was no homo sapiens. Don't go around thinking that humans could have even existed in such conditions.
An Ice Age is not desired. What might be desired is to avoid tipping the climatic normal, because what we will get then is nothing compared to the climate from which humans first appeared.
B) Making the polluters pay their externalities.
I guess it comes down to a personal level. What are you, and me, doing to help reduce our impact? Not totally for altruistic reasons, I have lowered my winter and raised my summer thermostat. This enables me to use less energy, AND saves me fiat also. I purchased some old paper company land up in No. WI cheap and have planted hundreds of trees on it. (FYI - The Wisconsin DNR is generally a really good example of cooperative/collaborative government in a positive sense - could be a model for other states) All for altruistic reasons? No, I plan to retire there possibly and I like trees and believe trees are good for the environment. Use less gasoline by purchasing higher mileage vehicles, buy higher efficiency appliances. Don't patronize business, or buy food from, corporations that are not at least a bit environmentally friendly. Recycle. Use organics.
It all adds up I suppose, but no government official has told me directly to do any of this, I would resent it if they did. All I'm saying is if people can be educated on ways to preserve and conserve, they will likely do it. Flying around in high polluting jets and tooling around in inefficient limo's telling me I am a bad person for being alive and producing carbon sure isn't the way to go.
If people can be educated... That's the question. And that is state politics, like it or not. I'm not for fundamentalisms like "goobmint bad" or stuff like that. The poison is in the measure.
One can do things voluntarily. And that's for the best. But not everyone does. And there are times when everyone might have to. As they say about population: if we can't control our numbers nature will do it for us. And it won't be pretty. We can do it voluntarily and peacefully without resorting to murder. Time is running out and nobody seems to be doing shit. So, there goes the voluntary argument.
"Flying around in high polluting jets and tooling around in inefficient limo's telling me I am a bad person for being alive and producing carbon sure isn't the way to go."
And when someone flying around in high polluting jets and tooling around in inefficient limo's keeps telling you the scientific community is a lie and AGW is a hoax, why do you believe em then? Those are the Cocks. That's Heartland.
......"if we can't control our numbers nature will do it for us."....
Nature won't have to bother with that, internationalist banksters and their world puppet governments will take care of population control. Politically-powered sociopaths now have the means to emove multiple billions of us from the planet in a moment.....just by pushing a few buttons.
Look at this guy squatting in the White Mosque on Pennsylvania Avenue. He has the power in his hands to destroy most of the population of the world in a few moments., and we don't even know his real name or where he came from.
Instant Fail, now with extra flavour packets, add to cup & boil.
The elite of the world intend to RISE the population beyond 10 billion, never a decrease.
The most power they can ever have is when more slaves are born yet are going to starve without life-debt to the slave-master corporations & militaries, set at birth.
It is their sick wet dream that every one of us has 3 children more who we can't feed without begging.
The less fuel you use for your vehicle and home, the higher the price will rise......and of course more taxes and surcharges will be added.
The only reduction you will experience will be in quality of life issues.
......Retire to the woods of northern Wisconsin?????..... Trust me, I am 78 years old and retired. You don't know much about old age and retirement. You have a sometimes, trepidatious, unnerving, exciting, confusing, reverse-puberty adventure lying ahead of you.
Apparently dementia is also part of the package.....
Won't disagree on old age but fuel prices will go down with declining demand, use, not up.
I don't know about old age personally. But when my grampa started with the reverse puberty, it didn't take long to require someone else to wipe his ass. And not long after that he had to be sent to a retirement home because his "reverse-puberty" went into full blown "reverse infancy".
+1 for that
Achtung has fallen prey to evil imbeciles.......and has now become one of them.
Says imbecile in chief 'tseems
The U.S. could close its doors and shut down everything and it wouldn't make a significant difference in overall world pollutive output.
China and India would fill any such minimal reduction in pollution within a few weeks of expanded economic activity.
This constantly morphing global cooling/ice age/global warming/rising seas/climate change crap is just an internationalist bankster ploy to bleed an international tax payable to the U.N. out of the American working class.
I call it bullshit.
Hang the evil bastards.
Actually the difference would be GIGANTIC. The majority of Chinese pollution is to manufacture on behalf of the USA for garbage sold at Walmart and such.
No more USA = no more CHINA pollution either.
They'll still pollute a little but much, much less.
Shut it all down. Guillotines for the banksters & oil company execs, gallows for the mafia politicians, and junk scrap for the gas-burning engines.
You are a living human. You die if you can't eat food.
Warmer by 2 degrees planet-wide average means you could see +15 in your summer in Celsius degrees and -13 colder in the winter on the other side of the planet at the same time.
This is still +2 degrees average.
This means all your crops die.
No more food.
Then you die.
You get it now?
How to correct the problem: STOP BURNING FUEL. Period.
This will rapidly stop the process as we are RAPIDLY BURNING FUEL to keep the global warming process going.
No government can do this. WE HAVE TO DO it ourselves, one street at a time, one city at a time.
Government is the enemy and plans to do the opposite to CAUSE more global warming because it gives them more power in the short-term and they are stupid.
In the long-term this will murder every human on Earth but in the short term mayors and governors will become Emperors.
okay socal had a hot may, but this june is perfect, even if the water temp is close to the same as air temp. the last three weeks perfect, so forget global warming or putins russian bombersl we are living large. (complaints later)
Try this
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
Since 1880....
Was this created using the "manually adjusted" data that nasa and noaa have recently been cited for using?
NASA and NOAA stopped being neutral reporters of data on this long, long ago.
Why don;t you bring that up with Roy Spencer or Judith Curry, the only two climate scientists that are sort of in your camp...
Convince them to write a paper with you on this topic...
They will laugh at you....
BTW, the Kochs funded in a part an independent study, here are the results (Curry was one of group)
http://berkeleyearth.org/summary-of-findings
and this was the spokesmans OpEd in the WSJ, he used to say shit like "hide the decline"....
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405297020442240457659487279...
Whoops...
Nope. NASA & NOAA are the single most neutral so far in history.
Everyone else has a deeper bias and almost all the bias is to pretend there is no global warming.
Global warming is proved by evidence.
Denial has no evidence to support it. Nothing.
Phonestar, -- is that you?
NASA had satatelites in 1880 wow Nice try a555hole
Nope they had thermometers though....
Just like these guys
http://static.berkeleyearth.org/img/decadal-comparison-small.png
from http://berkeleyearth.org/summary-of-findings
NASA had thermometers in the 1880's? Neat trick for an organization that was only established in 1958.
Son, are you really that stupid? Do you think there might be other records they could rely on?
Why don't you be curious and find out for yourself, instead of being a 2nd rate smartass...
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
apparently there is a difference of opinion
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/05/08/coldest-year-on-record-so-...
Yeah, on one side you got the scientific community. On the other you got a charlatan like Goddard. Science vs Charlatans tend to disagree.
Man-made global warming is moneysucking globalist political bullshit.
Ovomit and the internationalist bankster criminals, and their political/bureaucratic/academic minions that installed him, should be hanged from the nearest lamp posts.....no trial necessary.
Lookie a Hedgetard!
No, man-made global warming is a 100% government & military forced genocide on the poor.
To deny it is to demand genocide on us all.
Those who deny AGW are those who should be hung and within 10 years, probably will be.
No carbon tax required, just gallows.
Those who deny AGW are the Banksters, Emperors of Earth, militaries, minions. To fight global warming by admitting it is true is to stand up and rise up against the mafia governments.
My location is shown on this map as "Warmer Than Average" for the Month of May.
I CALL BULLSHIT!
Did NOAA mean to say that the number of days where it was getting hotter in May were above average?
Here is the actual record for my area:
Actual Average
Month to date heating degree days 12 23
Did NOAA mean to say that we had higher highs to account for a higher average monthly temperature?
Here is the actual record. Left hand column is day of the month. Right column is the year when the record was set.
1 - 2007
2 - 2010
3 - 1913
4 - 1938
5 - 1934
6 - 1938
7 - 1940
8 - 1940
9 - 1936
10- 1936
11- 1916
12- 2000
13- 1933
14- 1933
15- 1933
16- 1933
17- 1941
18- 1911
19- 1996
20- 1938
21- 1941
22- 1941
23- 1941
24- 1938
25- 2011
26- 1926
27- 1953
28- 1941
29- 1941
30- 1941
31- 2011
If my region, which is clearly marked on this map as having unusually high temperatures, is wrong on the map then maybe yours is too.
Check your own history here:
http://www.wunderground.com/
Do you know what "Heating Degree Days" are? It would appear not...
Actually, the period between 16:21:34 and 16:21:36 last Friday was the hottest two seconds between four and five o'clock on a June 20th in history!
A new study suggests that a warming period more than 400,000 years ago pushed the Greenland ice sheet past its stability threshold, resulting in a nearly complete deglaciation of southern Greenland and raising global sea levels some 4-6 meters.
Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-06-links-greenland-ice-sheet-collapse.html#jCp